Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Thank you
Line 39: Line 39:
:Involved with WikiProject Electronics, looking for a faster way to stomp out vandalism. [[User:Armstrong1113149|Armstrong1113149]] ([[User talk:Armstrong1113149|talk]]) 00:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
:Involved with WikiProject Electronics, looking for a faster way to stomp out vandalism. [[User:Armstrong1113149|Armstrong1113149]] ([[User talk:Armstrong1113149|talk]]) 00:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
::{{notdone}}. Sorry, but after looking through your contributions, it seems that you have very little vandal-fighting experience. Please continue to use the undo feature or [[WP:TW|Twinkle]], and feel free to re-apply in a few days. Regards, &ndash;[[User:Juliancolton|Juliancolton]] [[User talk:Juliancolton|<font color="#66666"><sup>'''T'''ropical</sup></font>]] [[Special:contributions/Juliancolton|<font color="#66666"><sup>'''C'''yclone</sup></font>]] 01:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
::{{notdone}}. Sorry, but after looking through your contributions, it seems that you have very little vandal-fighting experience. Please continue to use the undo feature or [[WP:TW|Twinkle]], and feel free to re-apply in a few days. Regards, &ndash;[[User:Juliancolton|Juliancolton]] [[User talk:Juliancolton|<font color="#66666"><sup>'''T'''ropical</sup></font>]] [[Special:contributions/Juliancolton|<font color="#66666"><sup>'''C'''yclone</sup></font>]] 01:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
:::Thank you for answering so quickly! I'll complete a few hundred more edits than ask again.[[User:Armstrong1113149|Armstrong1113149]] ([[User talk:Armstrong1113149|talk]]) 04:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


====[[User:Looie496]]====
====[[User:Looie496]]====

Revision as of 04:20, 16 March 2009



Rollback (add request)

User:Anubis3

I edit and patrol a lot of higher education articles. I see and deal with a lot of pointless (and often quite vulgar) vandalism. For some reason these articles attract a lot of it. Rollback would be much more efficient for me and save a lot time. Thanks. Anubis3 (talk) 03:48, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Armstrong1113149

Involved with WikiProject Electronics, looking for a faster way to stomp out vandalism. Armstrong1113149 (talk) 00:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. Sorry, but after looking through your contributions, it seems that you have very little vandal-fighting experience. Please continue to use the undo feature or Twinkle, and feel free to re-apply in a few days. Regards, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 01:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for answering so quickly! I'll complete a few hundred more edits than ask again.Armstrong1113149 (talk) 04:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Looie496

I have been maintaining WikiProject Neuroscience for a few months, with several hundred articles watchlisted, and I revert a lot of vandalism. Looie496 (talk) 04:01, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Remember that rollback is only for blatant vandalism and not to be used in place of 'undo' and proper edit summaries generally. Nja247 12:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:nathanhillinbl

I've witnessed many cases of vandalism, and would like to be able to use the rollback ability to combat it. Wikipedia has a bad name at my school, and I would like to be able to help brighten it by making it the best it can be. Nathanhillinbl (talk) 02:12, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Remember that rollback is only for blatant vandalism and not to be used in place of 'undo' and proper edit summaries generally. Nja247 12:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yarnalgo

I've been using Twinkle for a little while and I'd love to be able to use rollback to help fight vandalism. Yarnalgo talk to me 07:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
information Administrator note Are you aware that rollback may be used for blatant vandalism only and not for good faith edits as you did here? — Aitias // discussion 10:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convinced that edit was good faith, considering the IP's other contribs. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 14:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done after further consideration and examination of the user's contribs. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 14:56, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Incredibly respectful that you ignored the concerns from another admin. Also, incredibly respectful that you did not give the user the time to reply to my question. Incredibly respectful and collegial behaviour. — Aitias // discussion 15:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry...? That edit, while maybe not a blatant attempt to disrupt Wikipedia, was far from constructive. And as far as I can tell, you never declined this request. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, there is a question left unanswered above. A question that should have been answered before this request is granted/declined. — Aitias // discussion 15:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, if I thought this question is irrelevant, I would not have asked it. — Aitias // discussion 15:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So if I'm understanding correctly, I'm incredibly disrespectful because I disagree with your opinion? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, you are not understanding correctly. And if you start twisting my words that won't help. I have asked a question because I consider the answer to it relevant for declining/accepting this request. Ignoring it is uncalled-for. If you can not see that, forget about it. — Aitias // discussion 15:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See my comment on your talk page. As an aside, how exactly am I twisting your words? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:45, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"[...] I'm incredibly disrespectful because I disagree with your opinion?". Never said that anywhere. — Aitias // discussion 15:49, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(<-) Alright, you've both had your say; can you now back off from each other please? I think both sides should take notes and move on, or move it to your talk pages. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 15:51, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if its worth it but just to answer the question, I was reverting that IP's unconstructive edits. He added one valuable sentence which was the origin of the name of the comet (which is already in the lead of the article). The rest of the edit(s) was adding many many blank lines and "<ref>Insert footnote text here</ref>". Anyway, thanks for the rights and I definitely will only use it for obvious cases unlike this one. --Yarnalgo talk to me 19:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:ZooFari

I have became addicted to Recent Changes Patrol and would like to try Huggle to try new tools that would make my task at Wikipedia easier. I currently use Twinkle and have been using it since my interest in patrol started. ZooFari 00:51, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nz26

I requested last week and was denied but told to come back once I have some more edits. I would like to be able to help wikipedia more with removing vandalism Nz26 (talk) 22:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
information Administrator note Could you please provide a link to your last request? Thanks, — Aitias // discussion 22:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:43, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Sorry, but you still do not have enough experience in reverting vandalism. Please consider using tools like Twinkle or undo in order to gain some experience in this area before reapplying. — Aitias // discussion 22:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. Thanks anyway Nz26 (talk) 22:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. :) Good luck, — Aitias // discussion 22:57, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:The Cool Kat

I was asigned rollback rights back if Feburary but they removed for misuse, i would like a second chance to prove responsibility (see discussion at User talk:Pedro#User:The Cool Kat). The Cool Kat (talk) 19:03, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I'd like you to wait a week or two after the original removal before regranting the tool. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:kyle1278

I would love to help Wikipedia revert vandalism and keep Wikipedia as clean as possible. Kyle1278 (talk) 16:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 16:48, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Syjytg

I would like to revert vandalism. Syjytg (talk) 14:08, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. A quick look at your contribs reveals several reversion of good-faith edits, such as this, with only the default edit summary. Aside from this, I see very little vandal-fighting experience. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:07, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you were blocked for edit warring about a week ago. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was asked to reapply 1 week after the block, which was exactly what I am doing. Syjytg (talk) 15:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, but I still don't believe you can be trusted with the tool at the moment. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:EronMain

Requesting rollback for reversion of vandalism. EronTalk 04:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Smenge32

Would like to use WP:Huggle to do some anti-vandalism work. Ben Harkness (talk) 02:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ladyofwisdom

To revert vandalism, i use lupin's tool to revert vandalism. Lady of Wisdom Want to talk Wisdom 01:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. Sorry, but you only have 28 edits, which is below the general standard. Please re-apply in a few weeks once you have some more experience. Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Techman224

I have been revoked from using rollback, however I fell that I can be trusted with it now that I've been using twinkle ever since Techman224Talk 22:05, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You really should ask the administrator who removed it. J.delanoygabsadds 22:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He said that the best thing to do was to request it again here. See here for more of the details. Techman224Talk 22:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, sorry. J.delanoygabsadds 22:28, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is anyone going to respond soon? Techman224Talk 21:50, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I have reviewed your reverts made after the incident and they all looked okay. Thus, I have regranted the permission per WP:AGF. Though, I have to ask you to be more careful than you used to be and to take the concerns given by the revoking administrator seriously. If the tool is abused again, it's very likely that it will be revoked for a much longer period of time. — Aitias // discussion 22:33, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hipocrite

I want to do some WP:NPP. Hipocrite (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you might be misunderstanding the purpose of rollback. Rollback is to quickly revert vandalism. For NPP, you might want to check out WP:NPW. Regards, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fully aware of what rollback is for. I find that NPP somehow always lands me at some spamhaven of vanispamcruft. I swear to only use rollback on obvious vandalism forever and ever amen. Hipocrite (talk) 18:12, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PS - stuck with a stock computer here so no NPW. Hipocrite (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alright then, sorry about that.  Done. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:16, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:DougsTech

To revert vandalism in recent changes. DougsTech (talk) 23:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked PeterSymonds (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) to comment as he revoked your rollback privileges in August of 2008. Tiptoety talk 00:07, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've given this a lot of thought, and have decided to AGF here. Your rights were revoked in August during the AN discussion, and you have been denied rollback since. Reasons: inactivity since losing the flag in the first place; edit warring to keep a rollback userbox despite not having the right (which you wisely removed later on); a block for abusing other scripts. Therefore I'm marking this request as  Done, providing you do not show such behaviour in the future. Your reverts have been good so far, but I should warn that rollback can and will be removed instantly if you misuse it again. Good luck, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Since his request in January for Rollback, which was declined, DougsTech has reverted about five undeleted edits, one of which was a good faith section blank. Wronkiew (talk) 00:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse PS's decision. Rollback is easy come, easy go. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wronkiew, I am curious how you find the removal of that entire section good-faith? It appears as obvious vandalism. DougsTech (talk) 00:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The explanation is a little complex, and it's easy to see why several other editors made the same mistake you did. Luckily, Obymunch wasn't blocked for it. Some IP added an external link above the infobox. Then, XLinkBot whacked both the infobox and the link. Another IP came along and copied in the infobox for another town. Obymunch saw the mistake and removed the bad infobox. This led to an edit war between him and several rollbackers, which was exacerbated by the lack of edit summaries. Eventually, Gail figured out what was going on and restored the correct infobox. Wronkiew (talk) 01:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yousaf465

I use Twinkle to revert vandalism in the recent changes, but often javascript casuses errors,thus denys me the use of rollback to combat vandalism. User:Yousaf465 (talk) 20:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done bibliomaniac15 20:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A look at User:Yousaf465's block log reveals that he has been blocked three times allegedly for edit warring and POV inclusion-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 07:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, if he/she abuses the tool, it can be removed just as easily as granted. No harm done. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just keep an eye on him. ;) Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 05:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sk8er5000

I applied the other day as Teen Sleepover Kid, and was told to come back when I had more edits. Well, I have a lot more vandal reverts, and would like Rollback to use Huggle, and also because Firefox has started not to like Rollback. Sk8er5000 (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done either way (talk) 19:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:I Grave Rob

I use Twinkle to revert vandalism in the recent changes, but often my Firefox doesn't work which denys me the use of rollback to combat vandalism. I Grave Rob§talk♥stalk§ 12:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fattonyni

Easier vandalism reverts Fattonyni (talk) 11:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. This concerns me a bit, but you seem to have adequate experience. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Djanga

Vandalism reverts Djanga 02:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Acalamari 02:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Beantwo

To use WP:Huggle for recent unproductive edits Beantwo (talk) 01:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 01:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Glenn L

To use WP:Huggle to clean up various areas I frequently visit Glenn L (talk) 06:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Pedro :  Chat  11:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kehrbykid

Would like to use WP:Huggle to take down vandals. Kehrbykid (talk) 02:45, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 03:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wtmitchell

Would like to use WP:Huggle
 Done Please remember to only use rollback for clear cases of vandalism. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 02:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Firestorm

I frequently patrol Recent Changes, and I think Rollback would help me to more efficiently revert clear cases of vandalism. For most things, Twinkle is sufficient, but Rollback is faster and less taxing on the server for clear-cut cases of vandalism. Firestorm Talk 02:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:27, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Rollback&oldid=277568500"